Since the first draft of my reply disappeared (thanks tumblr mobile) I’m going to try and summarize what I was saying before:
Basically, I think it’s a bit unfair to try and completely disregard 3D animation as a tool and medium. I ABSOLUTELY agree that 2D animation deserves recognition and it’s deliberate exclusion in mainstream movies by Disney is a MASSIVE disappointment and is REALLY shitty. AND I agree that 2D animation has a MUCH easier time holding up than 3D animation.
HOWEVER, when 3D animation works to its strengths, there are plenty of examples of 3D graphics that do still hold up.
In video games, for example: Super Mario Galaxy released in 2007, but still holds up, as does Jet Set Radio and Catherine (though still a little rough around the edges). There are also plenty of YouTube videos and articles you can find that give other examples as well
For movies, I can see films like Spiderverse, Trolls, and Captain Underpants having a good chance at holding up in the future. They focus more on creating a unique visual style that fits their movie and are very stylized!
And even older 3D movies like Shrek and some of the Barbie movies look pretty good still, despite being almost or over a decade old at this point
Additionally—there’s recent examples of 3D and 2D animation being used TOGETHER for absolutely fantastic results, like in Land of the Lustrous or Promare
The main issue with 3D animated movies (+ video games) now is that plenty of companies care more about making a product that will work IN THE MOMENT, instead of trying to create something that will last. So hyper-realism, new technological marvels, and established tropes (like Disney’s sameface in its 3D movies) will be used in a shallow and easy to consume manner. It’s about the spectacle, instead of using these things as tools, carefully and sparingly.
It’s the same issue with CGI in many modern movies all but replacing practical effects. Plenty of these movies age like milk because they’re trying so hard to look realistic, but their CGI is basically left to do all of the work itself, which isn’t what it can really do. It should be used in tandem with other effects or stylized to mask the uncanniness (leaning into how not real it is instead of trying to trick the brain into thinking it is)
Jurassic Park is a well-used example of this. The film used a thoughtful combination of practical effects and CGI, working to the strengths of both to create a stronger whole.
Basically—I think it’s a little unfair to try and pit 2D and 3D animators against one another. Both mediums require a TON of effort and skill for the animators! One is not inherently better than the other; they’re just tools with different strengths and uses. Both mediums deserve to exist and to be used properly!
izzy806
kianamaiart
baratheonpilled
romaincrisis
areudirty
jacobvanloon
